It's hard to find many people who've worked as hard to create an open and transparent government as Carl Malamud. To name just a few of his recent accomplishments: He's convinced C-SPAN to license Congressional hearings under Creative Commons, worked to free California and Oregon state legislation from nonsensical copyright restrictions, and was instrumental in making the SEC's EDGAR database free and public.

If you look over his work and website, it's easy to see why people call him "The Rogue Archivist." But why should such important public services be the job of a so-called rogue? Shouldn't the government itself get behind these efforts?

Today, the Obama Administration released nine previously secret legal documents written by the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel during the Bush Administration. The release includes two previously undisclosed OLC memoranda and seven previously undisclosed OLC opinions. According to the DOJ, "The two memoranda memorialized that certain legal propositions in ten OLC opinions issued between 2001 and 2003 no longer reflected the views of OLC and 'should not be treated as authoritative for any purpose.'" For example, the January 15, 2009 memo withdraws reliance on several Bush Administration opinions, including the opinion that the Fourth Amendment did not apply to domestic military operations.

We've brought you severalposts explaining Warner's unfortunate crusade to censor its music from YouTube videos, even when those activities would clearly qualify as fair use. Here's a concrete example: a YouTube creator that goes by the moniker Dust Films has pioneered a new parody video genre, the "literal video." The idea is to change the lyrics to famous music videos to describe what is actually going on in the video itself. The results are hilarious.

Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the government's appeal of Chief Judge Vaughn Walker's January 5, 2009, decision in Al-Haramain v. Obama (formerly known as Al-Haramain v. Bush - The case title changed automatically after the inauguration). The government had also filed an emergency motion to stay the case pending the appeal.

We agree with the district court that the January 5, 2009 order is not appropriate for interlocutory appeal. The government’s appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The government’s motion for a stay is DENIED as moot.

This ruling is good news because it means that the warrantless wiretapping case can proceed.

We've made two amazing additions to our staff with a new Systems Administrator and a new Membership Coordinator. Here's a quick introduction to our two newest staff members!

Aaron Jue comes to us from the New England Aquarium, where he gained experience working as membership coordinator, and the Japanese American National Museum in Los Angeles, where the history of internment of Japanese citizens during WWII got him interested in civil liberties. As it turns out, Aaron's resume said nothing about the fact that he possesses an incredible talent for baking — and sculpting — unusual cakes. To bid farewell to outgoing membership director Nicole Nguyen, he crafted a cake designed to look uncannily like a New Zealand sheep's head (thus endearing himself to the cake-mad EFF staff).

Last month we reported that Warner Music Group was using YouTube’s Content I.D. (aka Video I.D.) tool to effectively censor myriad fair uses. We asked people to contact us if they needed legal help and put up a YouTube removal primer to give folks information about their options. As a result we’ve seen beautiful film montages set to music, videos to assist the hearing impaired, and many other examples of amazing artistic talent that have been censored by Warner Music.

Scientists who receive funding from the National Institutes of Health are required to make their research publicly available within 12 months after the research is published. This "open access" policy not only promotes free scientific communication and innovation, it strikes many as fundamentally fair. After all, shouldn't taxpayers have direct access to the extraordinary wealth of essential research they fund? Moreover, as copyright professor James Boyle points out, the open availability of health research can have the laudable effect of giving patients the information they need to make important medical decisions.